It is my observation - let's say over a period of maybe forty + years that:
We should stick with our own kind - when it comes to Marriage.
~~~
I'm talking about Politics here.
Conservatives and Liberals should not be married.
Nor should Republicans and Democrats.
I mean they should not be married to each other.
~~~
Know what I mean?
~~~
It just doesn't work.
ever try to mix water and oil
16 comments:
lol!
Plato, "Statesman"
STRANGER: Then the true and natural art of statesmanship will never allow any State to be formed by a combination of good and bad men, if this can be avoided; but will begin by testing human natures in play, and after testing them, will entrust them to proper teachers who are the ministers of her purposes—she will herself give orders, and maintain authority; just as the art of weaving continually gives orders and maintains authority over the carders and all the others who prepare the material for the work, commanding the subsidiary arts to execute the works which she deems necessary for making the web.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Quite true.
STRANGER: In like manner, the royal science appears to me to be the mistress of all lawful educators and instructors, and having this queenly power, will not permit them to train men in what will produce characters unsuited to the political constitution which she desires to create, but only in what will produce such as are suitable. Those which have no share of manliness and temperance, or any other virtuous inclination, and, from the necessity of an evil nature, are violently carried away to godlessness and insolence and injustice, she gets rid of by death and exile, and punishes them with the greatest of disgraces.
YOUNG SOCRATES: That is commonly said.
STRANGER: But those who are wallowing in ignorance and baseness she bows under the yoke of slavery.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Quite right.
STRANGER: The rest of the citizens, out of whom, if they have education, something noble may be made, and who are capable of being united by the statesman, the kingly art blends and weaves together; taking on the one hand those whose natures tend rather to courage, which is the stronger element and may be regarded as the warp, and on the other hand those which incline to order and gentleness, and which are represented in the figure as spun thick and soft, after the manner of the woof—these, which are naturally opposed, she seeks to bind and weave together in the following manner:
YOUNG SOCRATES: In what manner?
STRANGER: First of all, she takes the eternal element of the soul and binds it with a divine cord, to which it is akin, and then the animal nature, and binds that with human cords.
YOUNG SOCRATES: I do not understand what you mean.
STRANGER: The meaning is, that the opinion about the honourable and the just and good and their opposites, which is true and confirmed by reason, is a divine principle, and when implanted in the soul, is implanted, as I maintain, in a nature of heavenly birth.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Yes; what else should it be?
STRANGER: Only the Statesman and the good legislator, having the inspiration of the royal muse, can implant this opinion, and he, only in the rightly educated, whom we were just now describing.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Likely enough.
STRANGER: But him who cannot, we will not designate by any of the names which are the subject of the present enquiry.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Very right.
STRANGER: The courageous soul when attaining this truth becomes civilized, and rendered more capable of partaking of justice; but when not partaking, is inclined to brutality. Is not that true?
YOUNG SOCRATES: Certainly.
STRANGER: And again, the peaceful and orderly nature, if sharing in these opinions, becomes temperate and wise, as far as this may be in a State, but if not, deservedly obtains the ignominious name of silliness.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Quite true.
STRANGER: Can we say that such a connexion as this will lastingly unite the evil with one another or with the good, or that any science would seriously think of using a bond of this kind to join such materials?
YOUNG SOCRATES: Impossible.
(cont.) STRANGER: But in those who were originally of a noble nature, and who have been nurtured in noble ways, and in those only, may we not say that union is implanted by law, and that this is the medicine which art prescribes for them, and of all the bonds which unite the dissimilar and contrary parts of virtue is not this, as I was saying, the divinest?
YOUNG SOCRATES: Very true.
STRANGER: Where this divine bond exists there is no difficulty in imagining, or when you have imagined, in creating the other bonds, which are human only.
YOUNG SOCRATES: How is that, and what bonds do you mean?
STRANGER: Rights of intermarriage, and ties which are formed between States by giving and taking children in marriage, or between individuals by private betrothals and espousals. For most persons form marriage connexions without due regard to what is best for the procreation of children.
YOUNG SOCRATES: In what way?
STRANGER: They seek after wealth and power, which in matrimony are objects not worthy even of a serious censure.
YOUNG SOCRATES: There is no need to consider them at all.
STRANGER: More reason is there to consider the practice of those who make family their chief aim, and to indicate their error.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Quite true.
STRANGER: They act on no true principle at all; they seek their ease and receive with open arms those who are like themselves, and hate those who are unlike them, being too much influenced by feelings of dislike.
YOUNG SOCRATES: How so?
STRANGER: The quiet orderly class seek for natures like their own, and as far as they can they marry and give in marriage exclusively in this class, and the courageous do the same; they seek natures like their own, whereas they should both do precisely the opposite.
YOUNG SOCRATES: How and why is that?
STRANGER: Because courage, when untempered by the gentler nature during many generations, may at first bloom and strengthen, but at last bursts forth into downright madness.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Like enough.
STRANGER: And then, again, the soul which is over-full of modesty and has no element of courage in many successive generations, is apt to grow too indolent, and at last to become utterly paralyzed and useless.
YOUNG SOCRATES: That, again, is quite likely.
STRANGER: It was of these bonds I said that there would be no difficulty in creating them, if only both classes originally held the same opinion about the honourable and good;—indeed, in this single work, the whole process of royal weaving is comprised—never to allow temperate natures to be separated from the brave, but to weave them together, like the warp and the woof, by common sentiments and honours and reputation, and by the giving of pledges to one another; and out of them forming one smooth and even web, to entrust to them the offices of State.
-FJ - Thanks for your comments.
They are too lengthy and complicated for the middle of a move - but I'll read them soon.
:)
I don't know about that Sue. I've been married 42 years to a very libbie lady.
If that is really true imp - then why are you still alive?
because i am sure that if i were married to the likes of you i would have killed you by now -
or myself
"Well Sue...let me put it this way. That was a really shitty comment to make about someone you know squat about. Except for my sarcasm in relation to your loonie comments.
I've never once attacked your family, spouse or children.
You just said you'd kill me....a father, a husband happily married for over 4 decades. A provider, a professional pilot, a friend to many people. A Viet vet.
Real GD Christian of you, isn't it? You loons profess, peace love, tolerance and all your nutty BS...and then you tip your hand. You reaffirm my solid convictions that you're all mentally deficient, immature, selfish children...disturbed and totally nuts.
You ought to do yourself a favor and check yourself or your meds before you spout off again.
Thanks for the affirmation that you are truly a screwball.
imp - don't you recognize humor when you see it?
get a life, will ya
And imp - why is it that we just start to be friends and then it ends all too soon...
Does this mean that you won't be commenting on my blog again?
It must be a full moon - the trolls are legion tonight.
Impertent - Perhaps I was a little rash is saying that I would 'kill'
you.
I apologize - because I would never hurt anyone in any way - intentionally.
but I will say this - I have dealt with being a bit 'loony' for most of my adult life - and what's the use of being nuts if you can't have fun with it. :-)
No need to be angry imp - can't we just have fun once in a while?
and furthermore your hostility against me seems to run a bit deep
Seriously...just what type of reaction did you expect from a a comment like that?
Maybe an OWS assault? Or a Bill Maher approved Fooking of Michele Bachman?
Or a normal reaction to an a "simply" threatening, violent....wishing post?
Impertinent - Check my blog in a little while.
I'm about to write a new post that you might be interested in.
I'm gone....and I seriously doubt that you could ever redeem yourself...to me...after that exchange.
Imp - Why do you insist on spelling
f*ing 'fooking.'
We all know what you are really talking about and that spelling is just insulting to a really good cuss word.
Post a Comment